THE NEW NORMAL: Nothing Matters. Nothing Means Anything. The Rule Of Law Is Whatever They Feel It Is.

InsightSpencerFernando

The mantra seems to be that the law doesn’t mean anything until it has been ‘interpreted’ by those in power. You can see how dangerous this is.

If you feel the law is ‘outdated’, can you just ignore it?

Of course not.

That’s not an option for most of us.

But apparently, it’s how the Liberal government operates.

Today, in the Emergencies Act Inquiry, the head of CSIS admitted that the Freedom Convoy did not meet the CSIS definition of a threat to the security of Canada under Section 2 of the CSIS Act – which is the necessary threshold to invoke the Emergencies Act.

Yet, he claims he advised Justin Trudeau to invoke the Emergencies Act anyway, because the definition of a threat to the national security of Canada could be interpreted more broadly.

How did he arrive at that conclusion?

Because the Department of Justice – run by the Liberals – told him so.

Reporter Sheila Gunn Reid gave a great breakdown of this:

“Kheir asks CSIS director to go through sct 2 of CSIS act to ask if Convoy rose to that level.

A) Espionage/sabotage? No.

B) Significant hostile foreign funding? No.

C) serious violence? No.

D) threats to overthrow govt? No. Didn’t even investigate it was so non existent”

“even after this, CSIS director advised the PM to invoke EA after he says he was “reassured” that the EA had a lower standard of threat to security Canada.

“That was not the product of you reading the act yourself, but rather being told the definition was different”

“Yes””

“CSIS director says he received advice from the department of Justice that the standard of threat to security of Canada was lower than what is detailed in section 2 of CSIS act (he said that bar was never met)

Which is why he then told Trudeau to invoke EA after mtg with him”

“So Trudeau’s govt, which desperately wanted to invoke the EA, told the CSIS director the standard to invoke the EA was far lower than legal standard laid out in the CSIS Act.

And he didn’t even bother to check for himself.

And he didn’t think anything was fishy going on? Sure”

And, as Gunn Reid so aptly notes, CSIS seemed to experience things differently than the law:

“The Director of CSIS experienced the Emergencies Act differently”

You’re probably looking at this and thinking, “isn’t this completely circular logic?”

And you would be 100% right.

Trudeau needed to be able to say that CSIS told him to invoke the Act.

But the convoy didn’t meet the legal definition or threshold under the CSIS definition.

So the Liberal government ‘advised’ the head of CSIS that the actual threshold was somehow ‘broader’.

The head of CSIS then went back to Trudeau and told him the definition was ‘broader,’ allowing Trudeau to claim that CSIS told him to invoke the Act.

Nothing means anything

If this is how Canada operates going forward, then nothing really means anything.

Every law can just be re-interpreted on a whim.

The government can violate any right or freedom Canadians posses, if they ‘feel’ like it’s alright to do so.

This completely subjective approach, completely removed from any connection to the rule of law, will be the end of any kind of stability or justice in this country if it is not swiftly rejected.

But many Liberal partisans and the establishment press don’t seem to care.

They keep backing Trudeau, and keep driving the country deeper into division and anger with little concern for the immense and potentially irreparable damage being done to Canada’s future.

Spencer Fernando

Photo – YouTube

***

If you value my pro-freedom, independent perspective, you can support my work through PayPal or Stripe below.

PAYPAL

[simpay id=”28904″]